Perkins Coie Turns to Project Management Tech to Tame Patent Prosecution
The law firm commissioned Elevate Services to create and deploy its Patent Prosecution Platform in a bid to better meet client expectations and adapt to a fixed-fee market.
January 09, 2018 at 10:00 AM
5 minute read
In the midst of increasing patent prosecution workload, Perkins Coie's intellectual property practice faced a tricky challenge: effectively managing its vast amount of patent portfolios without getting lost in the data.
“When you're dealing with hundreds of different activities that are going through for a large client portfolio, it's really important to have a way of staying on top of that, especially since the data comes from so many different systems,” said Rick Howell, chief information officer at Perkins Coie.
So Perkins Coie turned to technology, commissioning legal tech service provider Elevate services to develop a proprietary “Patent Prosecution Platform” that the firm launched in-house in spring 2017. Based off of Elevate Services' Cael Project Management technology, the platform essentially aims to bring project management to the unwieldy area of patent prosecution.
But the Patent Prosecution Platform is not your average project management tool. When managing patent portfolios, “what you're going to need is a different form of project management, one that is a bit more novel,” said Pratik Patel, vice president of legal business solutions at Elevate Services. He explained that such a platform had to handle “high volumes of rapidly moving portfolios,” in addition to constantly pulling data “from a variety of different sources.”
Therefore, Elevate designed Patent Prosecution Platform to integrate with several of Perkin Coie's “disparate systems, from docketing where we keep case information, to matter management information, to time and finance data,” Howell said. The platform then consolidated these systems into a “simple-to-use dashboard that allows lawyers to quickly filter and see all pertinent dates, where they are against the budget, what the priorities are for the next 30, 60 or 90 days, and what they need to focus on.”
In addition, the platform interface was configured to send alerts to users and show them a red, yellow or green light depending on a task's priority. Such functions are based off of predefined rules for what task should be prioritized among others.
For Perkins Coie, however, the Patent Prosecution Platform is as much about as allowing the firm to better manage and arrange its patent prosecution work as it is about meeting client expectations.
The platform addresses a “primary client concern,” Howell said, “which is [clients] need to know where we are with our anticipated spend rate and what patent activities are due, when are they due and what the client needs to help with.”
What's more, by automating a once-laborious process that entailed manually extracting data from different repositories systems and filing it onto spreadsheets, the firm now frees its staff up to “spend more time doing client work and delivering innovations in a way that is important for the client,” he added.
Eventually, Perkins Coie hopes to update the platform with a client-facing interface that gives clients direct access to information about their patent statuses. But for now, the firm still has to provide manual updates to its clients.
Of course, just having the platform does not ensure that Perkins Coie's patent operations will run smoothly. Like any legal technology, the platform's usefulness often depends on the integrity of data it ingests. And for the Patent Prosecution Platform, there were some challenges in making sure the data was up to par.
Patel noted that, when connecting the platform with the law firm's disparate systems, there was the challenge of “tying the docket data to the time data. So, right now the way timekeepers track their time is based on a coding system, and that coding system doesn't always ideally relate to the actual activities.”
So Elevate built proprietary algorithms that could identify “ the descriptive and narrative” content data in the docketing system, as well as determine “the date the narrative was tracked. From there, it combined all information to get a more accurate time measurement.”
But such data was still not completely reliable. “It's not perfect, it's not 100 percent science, and that's where the humans augment the machines,” Patel said. So, while Perkins reached a new height of automation, it is not complete automation.
Yet, overall, the Patent Prosecution Platform has provided financial benefits for the firm. It is, after all, a vital way for the firm to stay profitable as clients increasingly demand fixed fees for patent prosecution work.
“Law firms have a tremendous burden not only to track the work, but to track if they're profitable on their work because they have to manage it on a fixed budget,” Patel said.
And, as fixed fees become more common in the legal industry, Elevate Services is opening up the Patent Prosecution Platform to other law firms.
“We officially released the platform to other firms late last year, so it became available in 2017,” Patel said. “We now have three other firms piloting or about to pilot; they are in their final integration process.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250